We archived around 86 million music files, representing around 99.6% of listens. It’s a little under 300TB in total size.
The data will be released in different stages on our Torrents page:
Metadata (Dec 2025)
Music files (releasing in order of popularity)
Additional file metadata (torrent paths and checksums)
Album art
.zstdpatch files (to reconstruct original files before we added embedded metadata)
God bless Annas Archive
@staff If this is truly “innapropriate” let me know. Not sure why this would not be allowed in the off topic section. Archive sites are already used on PG all the time.
It is not promoting anything. This is legitimate news. People link articles using archive sites to bypass paywalls all the time here. Which is also technically “piracy”. I never see you complain about that.
Don’t worry the enshitified corporations will be just fine.
A bit disappointed about the quality of files (looks like lowest bit rate), but I think it is an important endeavour, while also being useful for AI companies, people who wished to have an easy torrent to tap into for music self hosting, etc. Hope they make more money by selling this access.
It definitely is piracy though. But not sure why anyone would be surprised. Anna’s archive, inspite of the intentions of the founders, is primarily used for pirating text content and for training AI. So why would music be special? I am sure once they can afford it and technologies allow, they would preserve/pirate video too. At least I hope they do.
Maybe 99% of this is useless, but the 1% is too precious to allow it to rot and/or be lost in dungeons of contracts and corporate copyright squatting. It also enables people who cannot afford access or people outside service areas (Iran, Russia(?), etc.) to have access to knowledge, and thus overall welfare of humans.
I don’t think it’s justified to tell @Bhaelros to calm down when they’re simply participating in said discussion. Mentioning that it’s piracy, unlawful and potentially inappropriate for this forum in (what I perceive as) a concise tone feels valid for the purpose of discussing the link, surely?
I hate to be a stick in the mud, but this feels like turning a blind eye to the artists whose works are being shared. Anna’s archive profiting off this seems especially egregious, unless I’ve missed a profit sharing setup?
In a forum like ours, where we discuss the need for paying FOSS developers despite them providing their products for free (so that we may continue to have them), it rings especially hollow to me.
If the presented boon here is that it aids self-hosted libraries, or that it fails to support “evil” companies, would the better solution not be to buy the music directly via Bandcamp or the artists’ websites?
Or if Spotify doesn’t pay well enough/is enshittified, but you want streaming, is a service like Qobuz not better / more ethical (which pays artists more, employs humans for recommendations, and allows you to buy the music DRM-free to download)?
There is a wide gap between that and paying Spotify, which actually screws over its artists.
There is also an assumption here this will have a measurable negative affect on artists when its been shown over and over again piracy rarely hurts revenue.
it preserves music for everyone instead of gatekeeping it. This will be far more helpful then the short term profiteering of Spotify and long term gatekeeping you seem to be defending.
Obviously artists need to have their basic needs met like anyone else, but historically IP law has done a horrendous job at ensuring that. The vast majority of money just gets funneled to corpos instead (just as intended). You should support artists when you can though.
In EU, yes. I can’t speak for 3rd world countries. And if you torrent something illegal, like these Spotify musics in Germany, expect a hefty fine per download. (1000-1500 Euro min)
We could be constantly debating about art, intellectual property, and mega corporations that prevent or hinder access to music, film, video games, etc., but the truth is that 1. What you call “piracy” usually benefits citizens (consumers) and creators, and 2. Access to culture and cultural products is a fundamental right, as is the PRESERVATION and emulation of these products.
Putting up a paywall in any form only encourages discrimination and benefits a few. Musicians know perfectly well that they can no longer make a living through the number of plays on Spotify, but rather through concerts and merchandising. The same happens with video games and film. When different companies make it difficult to access certain content (buying a game for PS2 and not being able to play it on your Xbox Series X, or not finding the movie Amelie on any of the platforms in your country, for example), preservation, emulation, access to culture (or whatever you want to call it) is a fundamental act of morality and political activism.
This is my opinion, of course, I don’t want to imply that I’m in possession of the absolute truth.
